Could we please have a non evil/ammoral pact for Warlocks? :)

[Rechan]

This still doesn't answer the question why the powers of Good would rather be served by a second-rate paladin instead of a first-rate warlock.

How about the paladin and cleric is Devoted to that power of Good in the first place? Both classes have an assumption of discipline, reverence (to the God or Force they get their power from) and reliability - they go hand and hand with loyalty and desire to serve.

If someone doesn't have the discipline or conviction to become a cleric or paladin, how can you trust them to serve you? If they don't have what it takes to be a cleric or a paladin, what do you expect of them? And what traits do they possess that you can't get?

 

[Raduin711]

Isn't the Star pact supposed to evoke the whole Cthullu mythos?

Aside from the name, we don't know much. The 4e info page says that they make pacts with starts (stars). These could be crazy-go-evil cthulhu-esque beings, or something else.

 

[FireLance]

What would be the difference between a good/evil warlock and a good/evil cleric or Paladin.

If you can answer this question, I may be help you with yours.

Presumably, a Good cleric or paladin gets his power from a Good source, while an Evil cleric or paladin gets his power from an Evil source. An Evil warlock may get his power from an Evil source, but it does not seem likely that a Good warlock will be able to get his power from a Good source. That last bit is the part that bugs me.

We don't know enough of the game mechanic to tell if an Warlock of Good would make sense or not.

On the other hand, nothing I've seen so far seems to indicate that a Warlock of Good would not make sense. There is nothing inherently Evil about being an arcane striker, making a pact, or using an eldritch blast. With minor flavor changes, I believe that most warlock powers can still issue from a Good-aligned power. A warlock empowered by the forces of Good can be a vessel of holy wrath, issuing "judgements" instead of "curses" against his enemies, summoning Good-aligned extraplanar allies, and banishing foes to face the holy fires of heaven.

 

[Walking Dad]

Presumably, a Good cleric or paladin gets his power from a Good source, while an Evil cleric or paladin gets his power from an Evil source. An Evil warlock may get his power from an Evil source, but it does not seem likely that a Good warlock will be able to get his power from a Good source. That last bit is the part that bugs me.

Sorry I meant crunch, not fluff. What shoul be typical "Good source" powers the warlock get, but not the cleric. Also, all classes will use the new per encounter mechanic.

On the other hand, nothing I've seen so far seems to indicate that a Warlock of Good would not make sense. There is nothing inherently Evil about being an arcane striker, making a pact, or using an eldritch blast. With minor flavor changes, I believe that most warlock powers can still issue from a Good-aligned power. A warlock empowered by the forces of Good can be a vessel of holy wrath, issuing "judgements" instead of "curses" against his enemies, summoning Good-aligned extraplanar allies, and banishing foes to face the holy fires of heaven.

If flavour is anything I need to change to make new "pact sources" I will be happy...

 

[FireLance]

How about the paladin and cleric is Devoted to that power of Good in the first place? Both classes have an assumption of discipline, reverence (to the God or Force they get their power from) and reliability - they go hand and hand with loyalty and desire to serve.

If someone doesn't have the discipline or conviction to become a cleric or paladin, how can you trust them to serve you? If they don't have what it takes to be a cleric or a paladin, what do you expect of them? And what traits do they possess that you can't get?

So every servant of Good needs to be a cleric or paladin? Fighters, rogues, warlords and wizards can't be trusted to serve Good? I think it would be a mistake to conflate having a Divine power source with being a disciplined, faithful and reliable servant of that power.

For that matter, I think it would be a mistake to assume that the gods are the only Good-aligned powers around. After all, Evil gods are certainly not the only Evil-aligned powers. If a warlock can make pacts with devils and fey, why not with couatls (wasn't there a Rainbow Servant PrC in 3e )?

Now, it's one thing to say that the gods, angels, couatls or other Good-aligned powers don't make pacts with warlocks in one particular campaign setting, but an outright rejection of the idea that even a single Good-aligned power might be inclined to empower warlocks seems rather strange to me.

 

[Rechan]

So every servant of Good needs to be a cleric or paladin? Fighters, rogues, warlords and wizards can't be trusted to serve Good?

I wasn't aware that Good gave direct power to these classes.

 

[FireLance]

I wasn't aware that Good gave direct power to these classes.

This was in response to:

If someone doesn't have the discipline or conviction to become a cleric or paladin, how can you trust them to serve you? If they don't have what it takes to be a cleric or a paladin, what do you expect of them? And what traits do they possess that you can't get?

EDIT: In addition, if you have two accepted paths to becoming empowered by a god, what is the inherent problem with having a third? Why shouldn't becoming a divinely-empowered warlock require as much discipline and conviction as becoming a cleric or paladin?

 

[Rechan]

This was in response to:

Indeed it was.

But we're talking about the Powers of Good directly coming down, Grabbing the Warlock and saying "Here, HERE, have some of my actual power. I grant you the power to blow people up in my name, with my stamp of approval."

I think that's a little different than "Why yes, Mr. Wizard, Fighter and Rogue, please go and do what I ask, it'll be really appreciative."

 

[FireLance]

Indeed it was.

But we're talking about the Powers of Good directly coming down, Grabbing the Warlock and saying "Here, HERE, have some of my actual power. I grant you the power to blow people up in my name, with my stamp of approval."

I think that's a little different than "Why yes, Mr. Wizard, Fighter and Rogue, please go and do what I ask, it'll be really appreciative."

Well, let me repeat the edit to my post upthread:
In addition, if you have two accepted paths to becoming empowered by a god, what is the inherent problem with having a third? Why shouldn't becoming a divinely-empowered warlock require as much discipline and conviction as becoming a cleric or paladin?

Why should it be assumed that the powers of Good were the ones that approached the warlock instead of the other way round? If they don't do it for clerics and paladins, why would they do it for warlocks?

 

[Rechan]

Well, let me repeat the edit to my post upthread:
In addition, if you have two accepted paths to becoming empowered by a god, what is the inherent problem with having a third? Why shouldn't becoming a divinely-empowered warlock require as much discipline and conviction as becoming a cleric or paladin?

Well, the fluff involved with Warlocks implies that it's basically a short-cut for power, and just get the power period. Not a lot of "training" involved.

Finally, if one can just go directly to the god and say "Hey, gimmie powarz", then what's the point of being a paladin or a cleric when you can be a warlock and get your powarz right now? Where's the drawback?

Why should it be assumed that the powers of Good were the ones that approached the warlock instead of the other way round? If they don't do it for clerics and paladins, why would they do it for warlocks?

That was hyperbole for effect.